Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Reassessment jurisdiction fails where unverified portal information is aggregated without examining the taxpayer's explanation or relevance of entries...
Statutory sanction for delayed reassessment requires approval from the prescribed authority; approval by an inferior authority invalidates jurisdictio...
Transfer pricing margin adjustments require matching treatment of non-operating income and related costs, with comparability issues reconsidered on ev...
Preliminary-expense amortisation and MAT exempt-income adjustments prevailed, while trademark costs and managerial remuneration require fresh verifica...
Export valuation requires contemporaneous evidence; unrelated invoices cannot prove overvaluation, and dual penalties on firm and partner are impermis...
Voice termination service receipts were held not to be royalty or fees for technical services under the Act or the India-USA DTAA because the payment was for a standard telecom service, with no transfer of a right in equipment, intellectual property, or any secret process. The Tribunal followed prior coordinate bench and HC rulings, and held that retrospective domestic amendments broadening "process" could not enlarge the treaty definition of royalty through Article 3(2). The receipts were therefore business profits, and in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, they were not taxable in India.
Voice termination service receipts were held not to be royalty or fees for technical services under the Act or the India-USA DTAA because the payment was for a standard telecom service, with no transfer of a right in equipment, intellectual property, or any secret process. The Tribunal followed prior coordinate bench and HC rulings, and held that retrospective domestic amendments broadening "process" could not enlarge the treaty definition of royalty through Article 3(2). The receipts were therefore business profits, and in the absence of a permanent establishment in India, they were not taxable in India.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
